> Also, it may be very useful to try all your code on 'new' *without* > taking > advantage of the new features, and reporting back on any > breakage.
That's more what I was thinking. While I find the new features interesting, I'm less jazzed about spending the time to build on features that might go away. (Chicken and egg, of course.) It sounds like it's mostly the bleeding edge of `new` that's bleeding, so to speak, and the stable part is fairly reliable. If that's a correct impression, then it's probably worth developing against it. I'm not overly concerned about the occasional regression, because it's easy enough to switch to master to verify. It's systematic regression that I'd like to avoid. > You won't have to wait too long though, I suspect. Once 1.1 is > out the door I assume 'new' will be merged into 'master' fairly > quickly. All the more reason to bang on it now, I suppose! -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
